The Higher Labor Court of Munich awarded €100,000 in damages to a 24-year-old law student who was dismissed from his job as a waiter after attempting to establish a works council at a local hospitality business. The decision followed what the court deemed a clear pattern of retaliation by the employer.
The case, recently brought to public attention through a report by Legal Tribune Online, may have broader implications for labor rights across the country.
Retaliation for Seeking Worker Representation
While working part-time in the restaurant industry alongside his legal studies, the student initiated efforts to form a works council. This apparently angered management. He was subsequently removed from the staff schedule for several months. When he was eventually asked to return to work, it was not to his original service position but rather to the kitchen—a move interpreted by the court as a punitive demotion. His refusal to accept the new role was used by the employer as grounds for immediate dismissal.
Court Finds Clear Evidence of Discrimination and Deception
The Higher Labor Court found that the dismissal was entirely linked to the student’s labor organizing and that the employer’s claim of insubordination was a pretext. The court awarded him full compensation for lost wages dating back to August 2021, including estimated tips of €100 per shift and the financial benefit of discounted meals and drinks provided after work.
Managing Director Held Personally Liable
Following the employer’s insolvency, the student expanded his claim to include personal liability of the managing director. The court agreed, ruling that the director had violated protective labor laws. As a result, the limited liability protections of the company no longer applied. The managing director is now personally responsible for the compensation, including payment from his private assets.
Thirty-Six Legal Claims Including Withheld Tips and Unpaid Leave
The student filed a total of 36 legal claims, not only concerning the unlawful termination but also addressing a range of workplace violations. These included unpaid overtime despite his classification as a marginally employed worker, the improper withholding of so-called “glass money” (a gratuity fund), and deductions for uniform laundering.
In addition, the employer had failed to inform him of his right to annual leave, resulting in an accumulation of 72 unused vacation days—the equivalent of 29 full weeks. The obligation to compensate for these leave days has since been transferred to the successor company that took over operations after the insolvency.
The ruling is not yet legally binding.
Latest Posts
